Oninit cdi / Archive
Talk to an expert →

Re: Raw Disk still preferred for 11.5? - File system type for SDS

Posted in 2008

Topics: High Availability & Replication, Performance & Tuning, Server Administration, Clustering, Grid & MACH11

John Carlson — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Laurie Gustin wrote: > Thanks so much for all the feedback, I have learned a great deal. I > think we will go with a cooked system. I think it will be better > administratively, since they wont give me root access to the new servers > and it will be a chance to try something new and test the performance. > > Now I am getting questions from the sys admins about file system type. > We are going to implement SDS servers that will access the same disk on > a SAN. As of today.. the plan is to use OCFS file system. (rather than > Risser or ext3). Any comments on this? Not sure about OCFS -- Oracle Cluster File System. Sounds like fun to implement . . . I've heard that RieserFS isn't good for databases, as well as ext3 (or any other journaled file system). And make sure those pesky SysAdmin / Operations-type people don't get frisky with the "rm" command. As far as I know in the *ixes, there is no "unrm". 8-)

↪ replying to John Carlson
Obnoxio The Clown — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

John Carlson said: > > I've heard that RieserFS isn't good for databases, as well as ext3 (or > any other journaled file system). It's not that they're "not good" -- they absolutely suck. -- Bye now, Obnoxio http://obotheclown.blogspot.com/

↪ replying to Obnoxio The Clown
Superboer — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

> It's not that they're "not good" -- they absolutely suck. it's worse then that, it will loose/corrupt data too... Superboer.

↪ replying to John Carlson
InDeep — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Well, since you're late again to the party John, what, 2 weeks later... OCFS is designed for shared disk implementations. It was designed specifically for Oracle so you can implement RAC and other configurations. A small amount of research can answer a lot of questions. See also: VxFS - http://www.symantec.com/business/storage-foundation-cluster-file-system OCFS - http://oss.oracle.com/projects/ocfs/ Reiser - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Reiser -- Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. Terry Pratchett John Carlson wrote: > Laurie Gustin wrote: >> Thanks so much for all the feedback, I have learned a great deal. I >> think we will go with a cooked system. I think it will be better >> administratively, since they wont give me root access to the new >> servers and it will be a chance to try something new and test the >> performance. >> >> Now I am getting questions from the sys admins about file system >> type. We are going to implement SDS servers that will access the same >> disk on a SAN. As of today.. the plan is to use OCFS file system. >> (rather than Risser or ext3). Any comments on this? > > Not sure about OCFS -- Oracle Cluster File System. Sounds like fun to > implement . . . > > I've heard that RieserFS isn't good for databases, as well as ext3 (or > any other journaled file system). > > And make sure those pesky SysAdmin / Operations-type people don't get > frisky with the "rm" command. As far as I know in the *ixes, there is > no "unrm". 8-)

Glossary